What I learned from the Mock Trial

 What I Learned From the Mock Trial

In listening to the mock trial for the Board of Regents v. Bakke, I learned a lot of different and interesting things. The first thing I learned was the premise of the case in which Alan Bakke was denied acceptance into UCLA's medical school despite having higher scores than that of the average candidate. When he sued the school, he sued them because he believed that it was unconstitutional to reserve sixteen of the one-hundred spots for minorities, minorities that could have had worse scores than him. When the Supreme Court made their decision, they decided it was unconstitutional for schools to make racial quotas and then reserve spots in their school to meet those quotas, but they did not rule it unconstitutional to make race one of many factors that can be used when accepting or denying applicants. I think this ties in to a lot of what is going on today in 2021. I hear it all the time that affirmative action is either good or bad for the American collegiate education system. I, personally, don't know how to feel about it and whether or not it is good or bad. However, this mock trial gave me a lot of points that I can use to help me decide whether affirmative action is good or bad. For example, one point made by the Board of Regents side was that Bakke simply might not have been qualified for this position and that it was not racially motivated. This could have been true and would solve a lot of arguments on affirmative action today. Perhaps it is that the school just does not find the applicant to meet the requirements of the school, and it has nothing to do with race, gender, or sexuality.